REKHA GUPTA Vs. BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. The writ petition has been filed for quashing the order contained in letter No. 241 dated 23 -6 -1998, Annexure -1, whereby respondent No. 4 rejected the petition tiled by the petitioner for new electric connection dated 5 -5 -1998 and also for issue of a direction to the respondents to provide electric connection to the petitioner forthwith.

(2.) One Dr. Mrs. Saroj Rani Sinhawas owner of Municipal Survey Plot Nos. 1367, 1368 and 1369, Holding No. 1248/845 of 1984 -85 situated at Mohalla East Lohanipur, Patoa. She executed power of attorney in favour of B.N. Sinha, respondent No. 5. One Raj Kumar S/o Ram Swaroop Singh was a tenant in the said premises. He established a press, namely, Anokha Printing Works. He was provided electric connection bearing consumer No. 16 -32605406 -A. He did not pay electric dues and vacated the premises in the year 1995 -96. The petitioner purchased a portion of the said building measuring an area 10 dhur by a registered sale -deed dated 17 -12 -1997 for a consideration of Rs. 90,000/ - and came in possession over the purchased portion since then. The petitioner filed an application dated 5 -5 -1998 for new electric connection which was rejected vide order dated 23 -6 -1998, Annexure -1, on the ground that there were electric dues to the tune of Rs. 80,032/ - against Anokha Printing Works due to which line was disconnected. The owner of the house has sold the premises to different persons. Unless dues are recovered, it. is not possible to provide electric connection to the petitioner. The claim of the petitioner is that she is bona fide purchaser and has no relation/connection with Raj Kumar, the proprietor of Anokha Printing Works. The respondent -Board has also initiated a certificate proceeding bearing No. 4107 of 1995 -96 against Raj Kumar for realisation of electric dues. Raj Kumar, the owner of Anokha Printing Works has also filed a petition before the Electricity Board for settlement of dues. The Respondent -Board cannot deny electric connection to the petitioner on the ground of dues against erstwhile consumer.

(3.) A counter -affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 5 wherein stand has been taken that neither the petitioner, who is a bona fide purchaser, nor the vendor is liable for payment of electric dues against occupier/tenant, namely, Raj Kumar, the owner of Anokha Printing Works as there was a contract between Electricity Board and the defaulter consumer for supply of electricity and payment thereof, the same cannot be enforced against the vendee or vendor.